Politics Enough with the Hillary cult: Her admirers ignore reality, dream of worshipping a queen

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Transplanting this from the other thread since Mags objected to discussing it there:

I'm not spinning or defending Hillary and Trump, I just don't understand what is supposed to be funny about Delaware corporations?

barfo
 
Transplanting this from the other thread since Mags objected to discussing it there:

I'm not spinning or defending Hillary

Then you go on to spin and defend Hiliar

I just don't understand what is supposed to be funny about Delaware corporations?
barfo
 
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2016/trump_41_clinton_39

Last week, Rasmussen Reports gave voters the option of staying home on Election Day if Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump are the big party nominees, and six percent (6%) said that’s what they intend to do for now. Clinton and Trump were tied with 38% support each; 16% said they would vote for some other candidate, and two percent (2%) were undecided.

But Trump edges slightly ahead if the stay-at-home option is removed. Trump also now does twice as well among Democrats as Clinton does among Republicans.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of Likely U.S. Voters finds Trump with 41% support to Clinton’s 39%. Fifteen percent (15%) prefer some other candidate, and five percent (5%) are undecided. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

This is the first time Trump has led the matchup since last October. Clinton held a 41% to 36% advantage in early March.
 
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2016/trump_41_clinton_39

Last week, Rasmussen Reports gave voters the option of staying home on Election Day if Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump are the big party nominees, and six percent (6%) said that’s what they intend to do for now. Clinton and Trump were tied with 38% support each; 16% said they would vote for some other candidate, and two percent (2%) were undecided.

But Trump edges slightly ahead if the stay-at-home option is removed. Trump also now does twice as well among Democrats as Clinton does among Republicans.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of Likely U.S. Voters finds Trump with 41% support to Clinton’s 39%. Fifteen percent (15%) prefer some other candidate, and five percent (5%) are undecided. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

This is the first time Trump has led the matchup since last October. Clinton held a 41% to 36% advantage in early March.

It's like a choice between syphilis of the eye or cancer of the dick.
 
I am a supporter of the American Revolution and anti-monarchy. I don't care a damn about the British queen, her offspring, or their spouses.

I just want a competent president. Although I disagree with her on many issues, I think Hillary Clinton may well be a competent president.
 
Not really a Stockman fan. Lefties love the guy because he didn't agree 100% with Reaganomics.

But this is just brilliantly written, especially the first part.

http://davidstockmanscontracorner.com/anything-trumps-hillary/

It’s all over except the shouting. That is, the primary election season effectively ended last night and now the actual shouting match between Hillary and The Donald begins.

This will surely be the most entertaining election in US history, and probably the most pointless, too. After all, Hillary wants to use government to make Government Great Again. And Trump promises to use government to make America Great Again.

But government doesn’t make anything great, including itself. It is a necessary evil that always and everywhere is driven toward self-aggrandizement and mission creep by the politicians and special interest lobbies which control its operations.

What government actually does is thwart the capacity of the people to pursue their own vision of greatness by encumbering their economic lives with burdensome taxation, regulation, roadblocks to opportunity and monetary fraud while saddling their public lives with endless Nanny State impositions and encroachments upon their personal liberty.

And, most especially, what the central state does in its current incarnation as Imperial Washington is to sabotage national greatness, not foster it, and saddle the economically listing American nation with a debilitating $800 billion national security apparatus that is wholly unnecessary.
 
I am sure there is a better thread for this but no need to have too many political threads soiling up the the OT section! haha :)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...lem-that-has-nothing-to-do-with-donald-trump/

Politico reported today on a Florida poll conducted for a business group in the state that shows Hillary Clinton beating Donald Trump by 13 points and Ted Cruz by nine.

Why is that important? Because if Clinton wins Florida and carries the 19 states (plus D.C.) that have voted for the Democratic presidential nominee in each of the last six elections, she will be the 45th president. It's that simple.

imrs.php
 
http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ss...ise_in_republican_presidential_race_fade.html

But don't expect Trump's surge to last, political experts say — especially after his attack on U.S. Sen. John McCain's war record Saturday.

"Is he the potential Republican nominee? No," said Larry Sabato, a political science professor at the University of Virginia. "I just can't imagine it. At some point, reality will dawn on the Republican Party."


http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/larry-sabato-donald-trump-real-candidates/2015/08/13/id/669925/

Donald Trump may be the current GOP front-runner, but it's "doubtful in the extreme" that he will become the eventual nominee, let alone president, University of Virginia political scientist Larry Sabato says.

"The Summer of Trump is unlikely to turn into a Year of Trump," Sabato, who heads the university's Center for Politics, writes in a "Crystal Ball" report released Thursday, in which he ranks the presidential candidates while putting Trump into a category of his own: "The Un-Nominatable Front-runner."

"Trump is an early season fling for many people, fun while it lasts but doomed to break up somewhere along the path to the nomination," Sabato said. And while Trump is still topping polls, Sabato believes there are some signs that his polling numbers "may have peaked," and pointed to statistics that show few people are really actually paying attention to the race.

On MTP, MSNBC:

Sabato: Clinton Leads Trump In General

http://www.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/2016-president/

Sabato's Crystal Ball

2016_03_31_pres.png
 
Well it's not really that everyone underestimated Donald Trump.

It's that everyone overestimated Republican voters.

barfo
 
There's kind of a big difference between Trump's unexpected run through the primary and the (hoped-for, by some) projected unexpected run through the general election: In the primary, people were saying, "We don't understand why he's popular and how he can be leading the polls among Republicans...surely it has to end sometime." In the general election, it's, "We don't understand how he's going to overcome gigantic, historic unfavorables and a big deficit...surely it can't be done."

Both are propositions that could be wrong, but one has a far higher chance of being wrong and it's the one about to be proven wrong tomorrow.
 
I can see cats voting for Trump, you can never trust a cat. Dogs will never vote Trump.
 
Well it's not really that everyone underestimated Donald Trump.

It's that everyone overestimated Republican voters.

barfo

There's kind of a big difference between Trump's unexpected run through the primary and the (hoped-for, by some) projected unexpected run through the general election: In the primary, people were saying, "We don't understand why he's popular and how he can be leading the polls among Republicans...surely it has to end sometime." In the general election, it's, "We don't understand how he's going to overcome gigantic, historic unfavorables and a big deficit...surely it can't be done."

Both are propositions that could be wrong, but one has a far higher chance of being wrong and it's the one about to be proven wrong tomorrow.

You two both sound like the prognosticators saying Trump had no chance all along.

I'm AFRAID he is going to win. This election cycle has been like no other. Trump has an uncanny ability to appeal to an awful lot of people and diminish and demolish opponents. He's barely begun to train his insults toward Hiliar.
 
You two both sound like the prognosticators saying Trump had no chance all along.

Trump could certainly win--I'm definitely not saying anything's impossible in this election cycle and, honestly, it just takes a random disaster (or an unlikely decision by the FBI to indict Clinton for the private e-mail server) to completely upend the race.

I'm just noting that there is a pretty large difference between Trump being way ahead and people saying, "This can't last" and Trump being way behind and people saying "He can't come back." As I said, both could be wrong, but they're not equivalent situations. In sports terms, it's much likelier that a perceived huge underdog wins with a 30 point halftime lead than that a perceived huge underdog wins with a 15 point halftime deficit. The fact that the underdog did the first doesn't imply that it will do the second.
 
I'm AFRAID he is going to win. This election cycle has been like no other. Trump has an uncanny ability to appeal to an awful lot of people and diminish and demolish opponents. He's barely begun to train his insults toward Hiliar.

Well, maybe you can give him a few tips, you seem to be up to speed.

barfo
 
The assumptions being made are that the electoral map for Obama will be the same for Hiliar.

Obama, like Trump (only in this sense), was a rock star, game changer, etc.

The previous status quo for electoral results looked something like this:
vote-map.gif


Granted Obama won, so the electoral map FOR HIM was > 270 EVs. But why not start with this map as the baseline?

Because if you predict Hiliar can't lose, you discourage people from voting. Anti-democratic, no?
 
But why not start with this map as the baseline?

Because the demographics of 2016 are more like the demographics of 2012 than they are like the demographics of 2004.

barfo
 
Well, maybe you can give him a few tips, you seem to be up to speed.

barfo

Little of what Trump has been doing is consistent with how presidential races have been run and won (or lost). He's not out there raising a $billion+ and he's filling sports stadia with huge crowds.

When he's not running a conventional campaign, why apply conventional metrics when trying to prognosticate?

If I were running a campaign against Hiliar, I'd run ads showing her lying outright. Emphasize how she is psychotic about it.

I'd run ads showing her as Secy. of State, mention it's her only real experience in the executive branch, then show pictures of bombed out Libya and Syria and the refugee crisis. All her doing, she was the Secy of State, after all.

Benghazi ad: mention how we lost the first ambassador since the Carter years, and show her screaming, "what difference does it make?" Maybe a clip from her red phone, "who do you want to answer it at 3AM?"

The email server scandal. If not criminal, it does speak to her willingness to follow rules and transparent governing.

It's like shooting fish in a barrel.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Aly
Because the demographics of 2016 are more like the demographics of 2012 than they are like the demographics of 2004.

barfo

Says who?

The statewide election results in 2010 and 2014 say you're wrong.

2015Governors_zpsc15e9f41.jpg
 
Says who?

The statewide election results in 2010 and 2014 say you're wrong.

Sez me.

Election results and demographics aren't the same thing.

Statewide elections and presidential elections aren't the same thing.

Off-year elections and presidential year elections aren't the same thing.

barfo
 
6.2.

Sense a trend?

Ooh, a trend.

If the trend reverses, will you tell us about it? Or will you just never mention the subject again?

barfo
 
Ooh, a trend.

If the trend reverses, will you tell us about it? Or will you just never mention the subject again?

barfo

Yep, I'll mention it whatever it is.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top